Skip to main content

About your Search

Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6
ban on gay marriage, prop 8, which voters approved in and on wednesday, the defense of marriage act will be argued, saying that federal agencies will define marriage as being between one man and one woman and advocates are warningave major cultural shift if marriage equality becomes part of the law of the land. >> i wish it were just about the marriage altar. it is about much more. it's about altering all of society, with marriage goes what our children for taught, parents losing the right to define the morals for their children. it's about religious freedom. they are intertwined in our culture. it's about the right to conduct yours business as you see fit. >> support for same-sex marriage has groab, but it's favored by less than half, 49% of registered voters. one of the attorneys arguing for marriage equality this week says he thinks his side will win and it won't be close since he says, marriage is a civil right. >> we are not asking for a new constitutional right. the constitutional right to marry is well established. in fact, the supreme court has ruled you can't take away the
is weighing in on the defense of marriage act. senator paul saying the issue of same-sex marriage should be decided by the states. the federal government, he says, could avoid it all together. listen. >> i don't want the government promoting something i don't believe in but i also don't mind if the government tries to be neutral on the issue. the tax code, i'm for a flat income tax and we wouldn't have marriage as part of the tax code. health insurance. i think there is a way to write it where it would be neutral and you wouldn't bring marriage into the whole idea of health insurance. >> will any of that happen. ? joining me, the anchor of "fox news sunday," chris wallace. good to see you. senator paul has taken this spogs. does very the support behind him? >> well, it's going to be interesting because this is directly involves the case on the defense of marriage october that the supreme court is going to hear this week. that case involves a gay couple, same-sex couple, one of the two women died. the other one had had been legally married in the state and she said, therefore, she should
boong gay marriage, prop 8 will be argued. then wednesday, justices will hear about the defense of marriage act, 1996 law saying federal agencies must define marriage between one man and one woman. supporters of traditional marriage are already warning about cultural changes that could accompany laws that permit same-sex marriage. >> it's about altering all of society. with marriage goes what our children are taught, parents losing the right to define the morals for our children. it's about religious freedom. two are intertwined and conduct your business as you see fit. >> reporter: support for legal same-sex marriage has grown but the latest poll shows less than half 49% of registered voters now favor it. still one attorney arguing for marriage equality that week is predicting a win for his side. >> the constitutional right to marry is well established. in fact the supreme court has ruled that you can't take away the right to marry even from imprisoned felons. you can't take it away from those people because it's so important, such a fundamental right of liberty. >> reporter: w
, the pure logic of his most famous utterance. the former secretary of defense said, there are things we know we know, the known known, there are things we don't know, the known unknowns and lastly, the things we don't know we don't know we don't know, the unknown, unknowns. the simplicity makes us nostalgic for clear thoughts. reporters are driven to get the answers to their questions -- the known unknown. but the unknown unknown, what really happened behind the closed doors, really disturbs our sleep. only if they let their imaginations run riot does the possible story behind the story become the nightmare -- what really happened. where is the truth? and worse -- what if the competition beats us? many are driven to guessing or falling for persuasion by special interests. only with the passage of time -- much time -- may solve the riddle. jonathan pollard was and is such a case. the story of a notorious spy who passed critical and classified informs to israel and possibly to other countries. to many, he is a martyr for the jewish cause. he grew up in america and was working as a civilian nav
said, israel has the right to its own self-defense as if it was some revelation. i listened carefully, i don't think the president said anything new or different from what he said before and i think in private, the conversations remained very far apart in terms of israel and the united states' assessment of what iran is up to and what it would take to stop iran. israel's timetable is much shorter than the united states and i think fundamentally, neither israel nor iran really believe the president's assertions that all options are on the table. i think as far as iran goes we end the trip pretty much where we began. the spotlight remains on israel and the complicated decision they face, whether to stop or force iran's program. >> jamie: thank you so much and we'll see you tomorrow morning. >> thank you, jamie. >> jamie: gregg? >> brand new details on the horrific shooting at a marine pace. what police are now saying about the three people killed. >> jamie: there's a possible break in the murder of a colorado prison director. >> and we're hurt across the country in law enforcement and e
in this country. then you got the far right on the other side who want to cut everything except for defense spending. then you got i think the bulk of the country which falls somewhere in the middle. i'm just wondering if the extremes on both sides should be able to hold the rest of the country hostage the way that they seem to be doing. >> well, you've answered the question. of course, they shouldn't. buff the problem obviously is that the extremes tend to be organized, motivated and both sides, in both parties, and that there is a whole glob of americans in the middle, certainly the majority, who think that there should be some kind of compromise here with some cuts, some revenue, figure out how to do it. and yet, frankly we don't stay up 'til 4:00 o'clock in the morning keep track of how these yoyo heads voted because we're sitting this trying to live our lives. i think that's the disconnect right now between interest group politics in washington dominated by ideologues and the rest of the country trying to make a living and looking at these guys and girls and saying, what are you people
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6